Bangkok: The government has provided a detailed explanation addressing public concerns about Thailand's engagement in "diplomatic protests," even when these actions appear to be ignored by the other party. The statement emphasizes that such protests are based on a universal principle aimed at protecting rights in the long term. According to Thai News Agency, the Joint Press Center for the Thai-Cambodian Border Situation addressed public concerns on December 29, 2025. These concerns revolved around the effectiveness of Thai government agencies' protests on international issues-such as the Army's protest to Airports of Thailand (AOT) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' protests related to the Ottawa Convention-especially when it seems the Cambodian side shows no interest. The statement highlights that filing a formal protest is a universal practice and the initial step in establishing a state's formal stance, carrying significant legal and diplomatic weight. Such protests serve as documentation of Thailand's rejection of actions perceived to violate international agreements or conventions while fully reserving its rights. This documentation can be used as a reference within the international legal system, communicating Thailand's position to the global community through international organizations, treaty bodies, third countries, and regional bodies such as ASEAN. Regarding concerns about the necessity of protests if the other party fails to respond, it was clarified that protests are "absolutely necessary" to prevent any interpretation of tacit acceptance. Thus, protests are essential for protecting a country's rights and sovereignty over the long term. Even if the other party remains unresponsive, the diplomatic record remains a valid reference in future international arenas. The statement addresses questions about Cambodia's apparent disregard for international rules, noting that the international system does not enforce rules as immediately as domestic laws. Some states may choose to violate these rules, as sessing that they can bear the costs. However, non-compliance with international rules accumulates long-term costs, affecting credibility, international relations, negotiations, and the state's image. Thailand's adherence to international rules is not seen as a strategic disadvantage. On the contrary, acting within the framework of international law helps maintain legitimacy and build international acceptance, which are crucial for long-term diplomatic, legal, and security efforts. The statement also differentiates between 'diplomatic protest' and 'military response.' Protests are described as diplomatic and legal tools used to document a country's position and protect its rights, while military force is considered a last resort, subject to international law conditions. Thailand adheres to a principle of using diplomacy alongside responsible national defense. For the public, diplomatic protests are viewed as a means of protecting long-term societal interests. They ensure that government actions align with the law and international standards, reducing factual distortion risks and building confidence that the government acts prudently and transparently. Furthermore, should any violations of international agreements or conventions occur, Thailand commits to taking appropriate action using evidence, facts, and diplomatic mechanisms while maintaining security readiness to protect its sovereignty and the safety of its people within the framework of law and international standards. 'Diplomatic protest is about preserving the rights, legitimacy, and standing of a country on the world stage. Thailand chooses to stand by international rules so that all actions are accepted and subject to long-term scrutiny.'